Our partners have counseled clients and litigated individual, class, and collective employment matters in many industries, including food and beverage, retail, telecommunications, construction, high tech, aerospace, manufacturing, and transportation, among others. We are also experienced in representing clients in administrative proceedings, such as the Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), known as the Labor Commissioner’s office.

Our cases often include high-stakes litigation seeking unpaid wages and overtime, liquidated and punitive damages, statutory penalties, attorneys’ fees and interest. We shape our strategy to the particular needs of each client and their goals, including developing appropriate litigation “exit” strategies. Examples include:

Baskall v. KFC

One of our partners represented KFC in an employment class action, alleging that KFC required managerial employees to sign allegedly unenforceable on-duty meal period agreements, did not permit such employees to take state-mandated meal and rest period, and did not pay employees all wages allegedly due. After months of extensive litigation, the case settled on court-approved terms favorable to KFC.

CRA v. Brady and General Dynamics Corp.

Our lawyers obtained summary judgment in favor or their client, General Dynamics Corporation, in a state court class action brought on behalf of former employees of General Dynamics Corporation claiming lifetime use of a recreational park and facilities on the former GD campus in San Diego.

Gomez v. Pizza Hut of Southeast Kansas, Inc.

We represented one of Pizza Hut’s largest franchise holders, Pizza Hut of Southeast Kansas, Inc., in a large wage and hour class action alleging that its California delivery drivers did not receive proper reimbursement for automotive expenses/miles they incurred delivering pizzas. After several years of intense litigation, including over 75 depositions and 15+ hotly-litigated motions, we negotiated a favorable, court-approved settlement on the eve of trial.

Perez v. RadioShack

One of our partners represented RadioShack in a nationwide collective class action brought in Illinois federal court, alleging that RadioShack had improperly classified its store managers as exempt from overtime. Many years of protracted litigation, including 100+ depositions and 25+ heavily-litigated motions, in coordination with other state actions pending in Florida, New York, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, resulted in a favorable, court-approved settlement on the eve of trial.

Goldman v. RadioShack

One of our partners represented RadioShack in a statewide class action brought in the U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania for alleged wage and hour violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act. After a three-week jury trial, the jury returned a complete defense verdict.

Williamson v. General Dynamics Corporation

Our lawyers obtained a court-ordered dismissal on behalf of General Dynamics Corporation in a federal court class action brought on behalf of 4,000 former General Dynamics managers who asserted damage claims in excess of $2 billion.

O’Gorman v. RadioShack Corp.

One of our partners defended RadioShack in a putative class action alleging that RadioShack required employees to improperly forfeit accrued personal paid absence benefits, on the theory that such benefits constitute accrued vacation time not subject to forfeiture. Following months of litigation, summary judgment was granted in favor of RadioShack, and affirmed on appeal.

Sangyimphan v. Tsai et al.

We represented a dentist and her husband in a DLSE wage and hour/employment action filed by their former nanny, seeking over $150,000 in alleged overtime, past due wages, interest, and penalties associated with her care for the couple’s minor children. The DLSE ruled in favor of the couple, awarding zero dollars to the former nanny. The former nanny filed an “appeal” in Superior Court, which entitled her to a completely new trial. At the retrial, we won again, when the trial court ruled in our favor and against the former nanny, again awarding her nothing. We continue to represent the couple in a subsequent appeal.